Methodological critique can disprove a proof but never disprove a theory

Evidence

Hyman and Sheatsley (1954) summarize their masterful methodological critique by saying: “Our major criticisms lead us inevitably to conclude that the authors’ theory has not been proved by the data they cite…” (p. 119). Notice the care with which this conclusion is formulated: the theory has not been proved by a particular set of data. A methodological critique cannot conclude that a theory is mistaken. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 642

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sets out the crucial epistemic distinction between failing to prove a theory and proving it false — a distinction that governs all evaluation of empirical work.
• DEEPTHINKING: This is a philosophically dense point about the limits of methodological criticism that resists easy summarization and applies far beyond psychology.
• XREF: connects to: Empirical psychoanalysis cannot explain why the subject recognizes the truth of its interpretations — Jean-Paul Sartre, Being and Nothingness: An Essay on…, 1344; Methodological disputes served as proxy arenas for substantive social theory conflicts — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2046; Empirical testing can only fail to disconfirm, never confirm, models like the CAPM — Donald MacKenzie, An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial…, 408 (+1 more)